Sensorimotor Simulation's Influence on Stress: EEG and Autonomic Responses in Digital Interviews

Overview

Journal Brain Sci

Publisher MDPI

Date 2024 Jun 27

PMID 38928608

Authors

Michela Balconi

Laura Angioletti

Katia Rovelli

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study explored the role of sensorimotor simulation in modulating the stress response in individuals exposed to stressful digital simulated interviews. Participants were assigned to two different versions of a Digital Social Stress Test: a simulated version with a dynamic-realistic examining committee (Dyn-DSST) and a version with a static examining committee (Stat-DSST). During interview preparation, behavioral indices reflecting stress regulation and resistance, response times, and electroencephalographic (EEG) and autonomic indices were collected. Higher regulation scores were found for the Stat-DSST group compared to the Dyn-DSST group, probably induced by the presence of limited external sensory input in time and space, perceived as less stressful. The EEG results revealed a distinct contribution of the low- and high-frequency bands for both groups. Dyn-DSST required greater cognitive regulation effort due to the presence of a continuous flow of information, which can enhance sensory and motor activation in the brain. The SCR increased in the Dyn-DSST group compared to the Stat-DSST group, reflecting greater emotional involvement in the Dyn-DSST group and reduced sensory stimulation in the static version. In conclusion, the results suggest that sensorimotor simulation impacts the stress response differently in dynamic interviews compared to static ones, with distinct profiles based on behavioral, EEG, and autonomic measures.

References

Balconi M, Fronda G, Cassioli F, Crivelli D . Face-to-face vs. remote digital settings in job assessment interviews: A multilevel hyperscanning protocol for the investigation of interpersonal attunement. PLoS One. 2022; 17(2):e0263668. PMC: 8820616. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263668. View

Sarkheil P, Goebel R, Schneider F, Mathiak K . Emotion unfolded by motion: a role for parietal lobe in decoding dynamic facial expressions. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012; 8(8):950-7. PMC: 3831559. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nss092. View

Balconi M, Lucchiari C . EEG correlates (event-related desynchronization) of emotional face elaboration: a temporal analysis. Neurosci Lett. 2005; 392(1-2):118-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.neulet.2005.09.004. View

Klimesch W . α-band oscillations, attention, and controlled access to stored information. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012; 16(12):606-17. PMC: 3507158. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2012.10.007. View

Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R . A global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983; 24(4):385-96. View

Balconi M, Cassioli F . "We will be in touch". A neuroscientific assessment of remote vs. face-to-face job interviews via EEG hyperscanning. Soc Neurosci. 2022; 17(3):209-224. DOI: 10.1080/17470919.2022.2064910. View

Gao C, Green J, Yang X, Oh S, Kim J, Shinkareva S . Audiovisual integration in the human brain: a coordinate-based meta-analysis. Cereb Cortex. 2022; 33(9):5574-5584. PMC: 10152097. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhac443. View

Goldfarb E, Seo D, Sinha R . Sex differences in neural stress responses and correlation with subjective stress and stress regulation. Neurobiol Stress. 2019; 11:100177. PMC: 6603439. DOI: 10.1016/j.ynstr.2019.100177. View

Davis J, Winkielman P, Coulson S . Sensorimotor simulation and emotion processing: Impairing facial action increases semantic retrieval demands. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2017; 17(3):652-664. DOI: 10.3758/s13415-017-0503-2. View

10.

Zito M, Bilucaglia M, Fici A, Gabrielli G, Russo V . Job Assessment Through Bioelectrical Measures: A Neuromanagement Perspective. Front Psychol. 2021; 12:673012. PMC: 8387828. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.673012. View

11.

Wood A, Rychlowska M, Korb S, Niedenthal P . Fashioning the Face: Sensorimotor Simulation Contributes to Facial Expression Recognition. Trends Cogn Sci. 2016; 20(3):227-240. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.12.010. View

12.

Williams P, Suchy Y, Rau H . Individual differences in executive functioning: implications for stress regulation. Ann Behav Med. 2009; 37(2):126-40. DOI: 10.1007/s12160-009-9100-0. View

13.

Balconi M, Vanutelli M . Competition in the Brain. The Contribution of EEG and fNIRS Modulation and Personality Effects in Social Ranking. Front Psychol. 2016; 7:1587. PMC: 5062540. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01587. View

14.

Jung T, Makeig S, Humphries C, Lee T, McKeown M, Iragui V . Removing electroencephalographic artifacts by blind source separation. Psychophysiology. 2000; 37(2):163-78. View

15.

Sares A, Deroche M, Shiller D, Gracco V . Timing variability of sensorimotor integration during vocalization in individuals who stutter. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):16340. PMC: 6218511. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-34517-1. View

16.

Balconi M, Bortolotti A . Resonance mechanism in empathic behavior BEES, BIS/BAS and psychophysiological contribution. Physiol Behav. 2011; 105(2):298-304. DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.08.002. View

17.

Abbruzzese G, Berardelli A . Sensorimotor integration in movement disorders. Mov Disord. 2003; 18(3):231-240. DOI: 10.1002/mds.10327. View

18.

Balconi M, Angioletti L, Cassioli F . Hyperscanning EEG Paradigm Applied to Remote vs. Face-To-Face Learning in Managerial Contexts: Which Is Better?. Brain Sci. 2023; 13(2). PMC: 9954592. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13020356. View

19.

Ahn S, Cho H, Kwon M, Kim K, Kwon H, Kim B . Interbrain phase synchronization during turn-taking verbal interaction-a hyperscanning study using simultaneous EEG/MEG. Hum Brain Mapp. 2017; 39(1):171-188. PMC: 6866597. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.23834. View

20.

Fleshner M, Maier S, Lyons D, Raskind M . The neurobiology of the stress-resistant brain. Stress. 2011; 14(5):498-502. PMC: 3287388. DOI: 10.3109/10253890.2011.596865. View